Hello, Daniel. Are you planning to make a video of Elizabeth Anscombe 'Intention'? I find it super cool her definition of intentional action which is those actions that a person knows what are they doing it (without observation) and why they are doing it (whithout observation). I'm trying to be more intentional in life and this book has help me with it.
0:30 these two philosophy students, looking unmistakably like philosophy students, being late and unable to decide whether it is inappropriate or entirely irrelevant to just walk into the room where a person that studied philosophy for decades is in the process of explaining philosophy are my experiences in philosophy classes in a nutshell.
I find this behavior not limited to philosophy students; engineering students carry this further: if the professor is a couple of minutes late, they'll fire off a letter to the dean calling for removal of the "offending" non-engineering prof.
You probably dont give a shit but does any of you know a tool to get back into an instagram account..? I was stupid lost my login password. I appreciate any tricks you can give me.
@Xzavier Bridger I really appreciate your reply. I got to the site through google and I'm in the hacking process atm. I see it takes quite some time so I will reply here later with my results.
The thing is that in common parlance assumptions about what the speaker is saying are often correctly guessed at by the listener according to common conventions of speech. "I have an idea" is actually commonly understood as the speaker is going to make a proposition that will require some action or inaction or change from how things have been usually done. Chomsky's theories/claims about speech/language are more insightful: it's all prelinguistic stuff in the mind that then gets processed, casually or very carefully, into language with it's rules so as to communicate that mass of prelinguistic stuff to others, often seeking efficiency of communication by, as the attempt to assemble the communication unfolds, pulling in words and phrases which facilitate the communication. So in India a phrase like "in a manner much like that of young Krishna himself he.......". Hindus, and most people in India will know what that means, but such will not be efficient for those who are outside India and not from India. While an "idea" is a thought, it is a particular class of thoughts and is distinguished from other classes by the word "idea". No sense in getting rid of words that are in fact quite useful and efficient.
I've missed a few lectures. (My fault, obviously...) But I don't see why it is more sensible to unpack "Nothing is red" as "It is not the case that there exists an _x_ such that _x_ is red" rather than unpacking it, unpacking 'nothing,' as the much simpler "No thing is red"? I get the quirky bracketing of reading the meaning of "Nothing is red" as if it meant absolute void has a colour, or by regarding _is_ as the equivalent of _equals,_ rendering it as "redness equals nothingness"... (which, BTW, it kinda does in a sense, like all colours, in as much as colour has no independent material existence outside of subjective perception) All of this seems more like wordplay: that sort of humor where one has to be sharp and keep shifting one's perspectives to find alternate meanings in order to get the jokes. But sadly, like all jokes, they kinda lose a measure of their funniness if you have to explain it...
It's not a question of what's sensible, it's a question of what reveals the true meaning of the expression. 'No thing is red', where 'no' and 'thing' are separated, *is*, on one reading, semantically equivalent to 'it is not the case that there exists an x such that x is red.' I will explain the 'on one reading' later. 'Nothing is x', however, appears to predicate x of something, which is contradictory since 'nothing' is not something, indeed, it's the absence thereof. 'No thing is x', however, is not predicating x of anything, since 'no thing is x' is equivalent to 'it is not the case that there is a thing which is x.' However, there is a certain ambiguity in the expression 'no thing is red,' which you picked up on in your message. The ambiguity is in whether the 'is' is an 'is' of identity or of predication. It's not saying that there is no entity which is identical to red, it is saying that there is no entity which has the property of being red. This is why 'it is not the case that there exists an x such that x is red,' is preferable to 'no thing is x.' It avoids the ambiguity despite being more of a mouthful.
K Tube agreed and nicely phrased. I also think an ambiguity exists in whether when stating some ‘x’ is not ‘x’ one means the negation of that thing as in the word ‘not’ or merely what is the, say, opposite of ‘x’ as in the word ‘non’. So ‘This is not white’ and ‘This is non-white’. What do you think?
*_source:_*
Ryle, Gilbert. 1932. "Systematically Misleading Expressions", in: _Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society,_ 1931 - 1932, _New Series,_ Vol. 32, pp. 139-170. Oxford University Press.
Hello, Daniel.
Are you planning to make a video of Elizabeth Anscombe 'Intention'?
I find it super cool her definition of intentional action which is those actions that a person knows what are they doing it (without observation) and why they are doing it (whithout observation).
I'm trying to be more intentional in life and this book has help me with it.
0:30 these two philosophy students, looking unmistakably like philosophy students, being late and unable to decide whether it is inappropriate or entirely irrelevant to just walk into the room where a person that studied philosophy for decades is in the process of explaining philosophy are my experiences in philosophy classes in a nutshell.
What a great comment
I find this behavior not limited to philosophy students; engineering students carry this further: if the professor is a couple of minutes late, they'll fire off a letter to the dean calling for removal of the "offending" non-engineering prof.
Two girls who were late in this class .They reminded me of me and my friend.😂 I was never punctual.
it was not the case that there were hours such that those hours could be considered office hours in the defined time parameter of the day specified.
You probably dont give a shit but does any of you know a tool to get back into an instagram account..?
I was stupid lost my login password. I appreciate any tricks you can give me.
@Augustus Edgar instablaster :)
@Xzavier Bridger I really appreciate your reply. I got to the site through google and I'm in the hacking process atm.
I see it takes quite some time so I will reply here later with my results.
@Xzavier Bridger It did the trick and I finally got access to my account again. I am so happy!
Thank you so much you really help me out!
@Augustus Edgar No problem =)
The thing is that in common parlance assumptions about what the speaker is saying are often correctly guessed at by the listener according to common conventions of speech. "I have an idea" is actually commonly understood as the speaker is going to make a proposition that will require some action or inaction or change from how things have been usually done.
Chomsky's theories/claims about speech/language are more insightful: it's all prelinguistic stuff in the mind that then gets processed, casually or very carefully, into language with it's rules so as to communicate that mass of prelinguistic stuff to others, often seeking efficiency of communication by, as the attempt to assemble the communication unfolds, pulling in words and phrases which facilitate the communication. So in India a phrase like "in a manner much like that of young Krishna himself he.......". Hindus, and most people in India will know what that means, but such will not be efficient for those who are outside India and not from India.
While an "idea" is a thought, it is a particular class of thoughts and is distinguished from other classes by the word "idea". No sense in getting rid of words that are in fact quite useful and efficient.
I've missed a few lectures. (My fault, obviously...) But I don't see why it is more sensible to unpack "Nothing is red" as "It is not the case that there exists an _x_ such that _x_ is red" rather than unpacking it, unpacking 'nothing,' as the much simpler "No thing is red"? I get the quirky bracketing of reading the meaning of "Nothing is red" as if it meant absolute void has a colour, or by regarding _is_ as the equivalent of _equals,_ rendering it as "redness equals nothingness"... (which, BTW, it kinda does in a sense, like all colours, in as much as colour has no independent material existence outside of subjective perception) All of this seems more like wordplay: that sort of humor where one has to be sharp and keep shifting one's perspectives to find alternate meanings in order to get the jokes. But sadly, like all jokes, they kinda lose a measure of their funniness if you have to explain it...
It's not a question of what's sensible, it's a question of what reveals the true meaning of the expression. 'No thing is red', where 'no' and 'thing' are separated, *is*, on one reading, semantically equivalent to 'it is not the case that there exists an x such that x is red.' I will explain the 'on one reading' later. 'Nothing is x', however, appears to predicate x of something, which is contradictory since 'nothing' is not something, indeed, it's the absence thereof. 'No thing is x', however, is not predicating x of anything, since 'no thing is x' is equivalent to 'it is not the case that there is a thing which is x.' However, there is a certain ambiguity in the expression 'no thing is red,' which you picked up on in your message. The ambiguity is in whether the 'is' is an 'is' of identity or of predication. It's not saying that there is no entity which is identical to red, it is saying that there is no entity which has the property of being red. This is why 'it is not the case that there exists an x such that x is red,' is preferable to 'no thing is x.' It avoids the ambiguity despite being more of a mouthful.
K Tube agreed and nicely phrased. I also think an ambiguity exists in whether when stating some ‘x’ is not ‘x’ one means the negation of that thing as in the word ‘not’ or merely what is the, say, opposite of ‘x’ as in the word ‘non’. So ‘This is not white’ and ‘This is non-white’. What do you think?
No one knows.
I'm so mad at this.
Freak at philosophy.
I'm not skilled at acting.